• TypicalHog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    What are you? Some kind of lidar shill? Camera only should obviously be the endgame goal for all robots. Also, this article is not even about camera only.

      • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. And once you figure the camera stuff out - you gucci. Now you can do all kinds of shit without needing a lidar on every single robot.

        • AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 months ago

          Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera.

          Expensive, as in probably less than $600? Compared to the $35000 cost of a tesla?

          (comparing the cost of the iPhone 12 (without lidar) and iPhone 12 pro (with lidar), we can guess that the sensor probably costs less than $200, so 3 of them (for left, right, and front) would cost probably less than $600)

          lidar can actually be very cheap and small. Unfortunately, Apple bought the only company that seems to make sensors like that (besides some other super high end models)

          There have been a lot of promising research papers on the technology lately though, so I expect more, higher resolution and cheaper lidar sensors to be available relatively soon (next couple years probably).

          • Grippler@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Yeah that’s not even remotely the same type of sensor used in robotics and autonomous cars. Yes lidar is getting cheaper, but for high detail long range detection they’re much more expensive than the case of your iphone example. The iPhone “lidar” is less than useless in an automotive context.

          • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Perhaps. Idk, maybe I’m wrong. But it for sure seems it would be so much better if we achieved the same shit with a cheaper and more primitive simpler sensor.

            • BURN@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Camera only should obviously be the endgame goal for all robots.

      I can’t tell if you’re a moron or attempting sarcasm but this is the least informed opinion I’ve seen in ages.

      • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I wasn’t attempting sarcasm, so maybe I’m a moron idk. Fair, it likely I’m uninformed. I just know my daddy Elon said something about how solving shit with camera only is probably the best path and will pay off.